Jump to content
If you see spam, or a scam, please report it!

TwinOaks

Contributing Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    4,513

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by TwinOaks

  8. Posted · Report reply

    I was recently bequeathed with a Viking 6000. It's stood up to many years of service for my Mom. It has the 'low gear' function, and I've got some Smetz needles for it ( size 110). Which thread size should I be looking to use, and what's the thickest leather I should attempt to sew with this set up. It's really nothing more than a home machine from back in the days when things were made to last, and I have no illusions about sewing armor bends with it. But I do appreciate some input as to what I should expect from it. My current needs are the occasional holster, cell phone cases, perhaps a wallet here and there.

    Thanks to all,

    Mike

  10. Posted · Report reply

    Well, now that I've found this thread, I'll offer my own 2 green cents. Why do I need a head knife? Specifically, what type of cutting requires this configuration? Currently, I'm getting by with an exacto, a utility knife, and an old pocket knife an uncle gave me-using the modified sheepsfoot/wharncliff blade. Most of my cuts are pretty straight, with the occasional curve or wave and I'm getting by okay with these. Does the round knife/head knife really come into its own with the heavier leathers, like saddle skirting?TIA for enlightening a greenhorn.

  18. Posted · Report reply

    Wet mold the leather, while trying to hold the edges in place. This can have the effect of pulling one edge out of alignment with the other. Stitching then molding can run the other way- if you didn't leave enough leather between the stitches, you can end up with a pocket that's too small, requiring additional stretching. That might not be an issue with some holsters, but if you've tooled the leather, you could have to stretch the design. I'm sure others will chime in as well....

  19. Posted · Report reply

    For a lot of photos that I've uploaded to boards like this, I use photobucket.com. It allows the user to link to the image hosting site instead of uploading the file to the message board itself. I know that isn't an issue here, at the moment, but if you're posting to other boards, you may face restrictions there. Photobucket basic membership is free, and does include a resizing function. There are presets available for point and click interface- one of them is "message board- 800x600". A few of the first items I posted here were just hot links to photobucket. There's quite a few of them online, but this is the one I'm most familiar with.

    As far as programs, if'n you're getting Photoshop in a full and current version for $80 USD, then you're getting scammed, or you're buying a pirate version, possibly both. I'll let your morals decide on that. I use MS Digital Image Suite for a lot of my editing work. It's great if you're working with an exisiting image, like a photo, or a scanned/downloaded image, but I find it a little weak in the creative side of things. Of course, that could just be that I haven't found out how to do it yet.

    Gimp. Lordy what a program. I'm still low on the learning curve with this program, but since I've set up the laptop for dual boot -Windoze and PCLinux, I figured I need to learn it. So far, it seems every bit as capable as what I have, and the reports that it rivals photoshop don't seem to be unwarranted.

    Good luck choosing a program,

  21. Posted · Edited by TwinOaks · Report reply

    Nice work, Frog. However, in the future...

    ADD A WARNING LABEL THAT SAYS "DON'T OPEN THE PHOTO IF YOUR WIFE IS LOOKING OVER YOUR SHOULDER"

    I have two things going for me right now- one, the real roses I bought haven't started wilting yet, and two, the dog and I get along well, so sharing the doghouse won't be too bad...

  23. Posted · Report reply

    Thank you Mr. Kanaley for taking time to offer your input. I appreciate your experience on the matter and I'm sure all who are following the thread do too. I will re-evaluate my opinion on the sight channel based on your insight. Not guaranteeing I'll change my opinion, but I will rethink it.

    Kman, it's been an interesting debate to say the least, and I hope you're still around in the future.

    I think we've pretty well worn this one out, and can walk away certain that there are at least two, and probably more, opinions on the best way to make a holster. To all who've followed this, thank you for reading our squabbles :D

    Y'all have a good day.

  25. Posted · Report reply

    ... A properly molded holster is what provides the correct amount of retention. Some holster makers detail that more than others. Part of the retention is achieved by the stitching also. And if you have the stitching too far away from the frame of the gun, you're going to eventually have problems with the retention.

    I agree completely with this statement. I stated something similar in the post that you originally responded to. Also I said not to stitch too tightly. That shouldn't be construed as 'nowhere near'. Only that it shouldn't be so tight as to interfere with the removal of the pistol/revolver from the holster.

    A sight path is not a gimmick. Try pulling a gun out of a holster that has some of the larger/taller after-market sights on it without the holster having a sight path molded or sewn in. All you're going to get is a big wad of leather and most likely excessive wear on the finish of the gun from trying to pull it out of the holster without a sight path.

    If the pistol won't clear the holster quickly and cleanly, it's in the wrong holster. For high sights, Yes, a sight rail may be needed.

    ... Take a close look as to where the stitch line is in comparison to the trigger guard/dust cover of the gun. And if you happen to look at the picture of it on their website, you'll see a sewn-in sight path.

    From Wikipedia: In marketing language, a gimmick is a unique or quirky special feature that makes something "stand out" from its contemporaries.

    I submit to you that the addition of the sight path is an industry's effort to build a holster that can fit a particular model of pistol, i.e. 1911/clone, with a variety of options- such as aftermarket sights. If the weapon in question has the larger sights then a holster may indeed need that sight channel, and for those models of pistol the holster should be built to accomadate that. But, for standard sights, as found on most pistols that aren't modified (I know there are exceptions here, such a a Colt GCT) the sight channel is completely unneccesary. It is an effort to make one holster fit all of a particular type of pistol, and in doing so, provide a semi-custom holster at a reasonable price. It's an excellent business decision to use one pattern that fits many things. I applaud the folks a MS for being able to produce quality holsters that fit most guns of particular type, and supply them to customers in a reasonable time frame. However, the design doesn't cover all pistols. A prime example is that a new trend is to have an accessory rail. I don't see many holsters on Miltsparks.com that address this. Designing one is probably in the works, but opining that 'all holsters need to have an accessory rail channel sewn in' doesn't make sense. Custom building each holster would increase production times drastically, whereas having a pattern ready to go decreases the production time. If the sight rail was absolutely required, then why don't all holsters have one, and why does the IWB I made without one (as ugly that it is) work so well?

    I've got Miltsparks.com open on the other computer, and have been looking at their work. It is supurb, no doubt, but I'm having trouble with one image. Could you help me find the tight stitch line on model CC-AT? I can't seem to find it as there is another retention mechanism- namely the ajustable tention welt. I wonder if having a belt over an IWB holster would do the same thing (secure the pistol in the holster), by adding pressure to keep the holstered pistol pulled in tight to the body? It has always seemed to me that for the IWB style of carry, the holster is really there to protect your skin from the weapon, and to protect the weapon from your skin ( and sweat, body oils, etc.).

    As it happens, Mr. Kanaley is a member on this board, and if he could spare the time, I'm sure we'd all appreciate his input, as opposed to reading our bickering back and forth.

×
×
  • Create New...